The title was meant to grab everyone’s attention.
Firstly, I truly believe everyone who is claiming atheism IS an atheist. “The Thinking Atheist,” is included in the list.
My point is that The Thinking Atheist, and most atheists on the forums here, argue against god(s) and religion like they are angry theists.
Examples:
- Disproving the effectiveness, practicality, or function of prayer, does not disprove god(s). It can only prove that god(s) is/are either ignoring men, or just cruel.
- Disproving any “holy books,” cannot disprove any god(s). It can only disprove the god or gods associated with that holy book.
- Proving scientific claims cannot disprove god(s). Only proves that science is true, because any god(s) who can create, can create within the laws of nature.
- Proving theists are stupid does not disprove theism. Only proves that humans are usually stupid.
- Proving the corruption within religious systems does not disprove god(s). It can only prove that those systems are run by corrupt people.
The list goes on…
Also, The Thinking Atheist and many atheists here, use arguments that hold no philosophical or substantial meaning, or that don’t tie in with their own worldview.
Examples:
- True atheism cannot argue any moral code (evil doesn’t exist, because morals are subjective)
- On the flip side, true good/ virtue cannot exist in the atheistic, materialist/ naturalist view.
- And in accordance with atheistic philosophers, like David Chalmers, the atheistic viewpoint cannot explain conscienceness. Darwinian explanation would explain us being more like computers (http://clearysviewpoint.blogspot.com/201...bies.html)

If we are all truly questioning everything, and looking for the truth, then we are looking for the answers that all truly and fully explain all life’s questions. Theism is filled with doubts, but so is atheism. So let us move forward, being objective, and working within a consistently atheistic worldview.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Also, The Thinking Atheist and many atheists here, use arguments that hold no philosophical or substantial meaning, or that don’t tie in with their own worldview.
Examples:
- True atheism cannot argue any moral code (evil doesn’t exist, because morals are subjective)
- On the flip side, true good/ virtue cannot exist in the atheistic, materialist/ naturalist view.
- And in accordance with atheistic philosophers, like David Chalmers, the atheistic viewpoint cannot explain conscienceness. Darwinian explanation would explain us being more like computers (http://clearysviewpoint.blogspot.com/201...bies.html)

If we are all truly questioning everything, and looking for the truth, then we are looking for the answers that all truly and fully explain all life’s questions. Theism is filled with doubts, but so is atheism. So let us move forward, being objective, and working within a consistently atheistic worldview.

Thoughts? I am eager to find the truth.

Atheism is neither moral nor immoral.
Virtue is a moral judgement.
Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, which is a product of evolution.
We are chemical-based computers of enormous complexity.

Not having a moral lawgiver requires us to create our own moral code. Our minds have basic moral guidelines that have evolved by natural selection.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

Atheism is neither moral nor immoral.
Virtue is a moral judgement.
Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, which is a product of evolution.
We are chemical-based computers of enormous complexity.

Not having a moral lawgiver requires us to create our own moral code. Our minds have basic moral guidelines that have evolved by natural selection.
[/quote]

Agreed. Thank you for thinking that through. Now if many could follow through with that thinking, into their worldview.

Atheism is lack of belief in gods. I don't have to disprove god (can't) or disprove Christianity (can) to not believe in gods. All you need to be an atheist is a reasonable doubt and a lack of belief.

How's that for consistent? Anything else, like science and philosophic naturalism and humanism and secularism and Buddhism and everything else is separate. What unites atheists is a lack of belief in deities.

Myself, I'm a strong atheist in that I:
1. Find supernatural beings or forces implausible until compelling evidence is presented
2. Find omnipotent and/or omniscient beings implausible until compelling evidence is presented
3. Consider the holy texts of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam to be demonstrably false
4. Consider those religions to be immoral and would not worship those deities even if they were proven to exist
5. Consider Philosophic Naturalism paired with Secular Humanism to be a consistent worldview
6. Consider the Scientific Method to be the best method for determining truth

I think there are a lot of atheists with similar points of view, but NOT ALL atheists.

Nah. I mean, there's an intrinsic paradox. Being an atheist, arguing against god as if god exists. And if you poll a sample, you'll find a vast majority of atheists use the conditional "agnostic atheist."

Then there's me, all "prophet of god" and gnostic atheist. Thing is, for the ages, atheism has been an insult, and it's easy to belong to a group when you let outsiders define the terms. What's going on now, with this Information Age, is a gnostic revolution. Not that "god doesn't exist," which is a nonsense statement no one (other than a crazy-assed prophet) is qualified to make; but rather, "we ain't gonna kiss the ring of your god."

What we are going to do instead, is question motivations. Question moral absolutes, and find, from consensus, if moral absolutes apply to the locality or not. If such are a tool of utility, or not. Most of us, we don't "hate god," we hate dogma. We hate rules that say certain groups are less than human, when, duh! We know what human is, and what is, essentially, not humane.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: My point is that The Thinking Atheist, and most atheists on the forums here, argue against god(s) and religion like they are angry theists.

Oh really. Prove it. Generization. No proof offered. Most of the threads here don't give a rip about the subject. Most people here are WAY beyond that stage.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Example : prayer.

“If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.” (Matthew 21:22)
Nope. Proves god is a liar.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Disproving any “holy books,” cannot disprove any god(s). It can only disprove the god or gods associated with that holy book.

Got any gods left ?

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Proving scientific claims cannot disprove god(s). Only proves that science is true, because any god(s) who can create, can create within the laws of nature.

Irrelevant. The question is where did the laws of nature come from.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Proving theists are stupid does not disprove theism. Only proves that humans are usually stupid.

Show me one theist system that is not stupid, and show me one smart theist.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Proving the corruption within religious systems does not disprove god(s). It can only prove that those systems are run by corrupt people.

Show me one that isn't.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: The list goes on…Also, The Thinking Atheist and many atheists here, use arguments that hold no philosophical or substantial meaning, or that don’t tie in with their own worldview.
Examples:
-True atheism cannot argue any moral code (evil doesn’t exist, because morals are subjective)
-On the flip side, true good/ virtue cannot exist in the atheistic, materialist/ naturalist view.

What is "true" atheism. His Holiness has not yet told us what his Holiness has deigned to declare, ex-Cathedra, what that is. A-theism is absence of theism. It makes no further assertion, and CERTAINLY morality is not dependant on gods. Also Morality and evil are not necessarily related. Evil is a construct. There is no such thing as "evil". Get with the 21st Century.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: And in accordance with atheistic philosophers, like David Chalmers, the atheistic viewpoint cannot explain conscienceness. Darwinian explanation would explain us being more like computers .

False. It's not the job of atheism to explain consciousness, or anything else. Theism certainly does not even attempt explain it. Science is working on it.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: If we are all truly questioning everything, and looking for the truth, then we are looking for the answers that all truly and fully explain all life’s questions.

Speak for yourself Father.

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: Theism is filled with doubts, but so is atheism. So let us move forward, being objective, and working within a consistently atheistic worldview.

Tell me 2 doubts theists have, and 1 doubt atheists have.

Maybe your search would be more fruitful, if you dumped your unproven presuppositions at the door, and stop telling us what we do, and don't believe, before you've even met us, your Holiness.

What's with all these dogmatic refugees from Philosophy this week ?

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

(30-09-2012 07:43 PM)titus221_panda Wrote: The title was meant to grab everyone’s attention.
Firstly, I truly believe everyone who is claiming atheism IS an atheist. “The Thinking Atheist,” is included in the list.
My point is that The Thinking Atheist, and most atheists on the forums here, argue against god(s) and religion like they are angry theists.
Examples:
- Disproving the effectiveness, practicality, or function of prayer, does not disprove god(s). It can only prove that god(s) is/are either ignoring men, or just cruel.
- Disproving any “holy books,” cannot disprove any god(s). It can only disprove the god or gods associated with that holy book.
- Proving scientific claims cannot disprove god(s). Only proves that science is true, because any god(s) who can create, can create within the laws of nature.
- Proving theists are stupid does not disprove theism. Only proves that humans are usually stupid.
- Proving the corruption within religious systems does not disprove god(s). It can only prove that those systems are run by corrupt people.
The list goes on…
Also, The Thinking Atheist and many atheists here, use arguments that hold no philosophical or substantial meaning, or that don’t tie in with their own worldview.
Examples:
- True atheism cannot argue any moral code (evil doesn’t exist, because morals are subjective)
- On the flip side, true good/ virtue cannot exist in the atheistic, materialist/ naturalist view.
- And in accordance with atheistic philosophers, like David Chalmers, the atheistic viewpoint cannot explain conscienceness. Darwinian explanation would explain us being more like computers (http://clearysviewpoint.blogspot.com/201...bies.html)

If we are all truly questioning everything, and looking for the truth, then we are looking for the answers that all truly and fully explain all life’s questions. Theism is filled with doubts, but so is atheism. So let us move forward, being objective, and working within a consistently atheistic worldview.

Thoughts? I am eager to find the truth.

The difference between this atheist and every theist I've ever encountered is that I acknowledge that there are things we don't know (not yet anyway) and that we can never achieve absolute certainty or "proof" about anything except for maybe mathematical proofs.

Theists either pretend or are deluded into thinking that they've been given all the answers and can be 100% certain of it.